TRENTON – A state Superior Court judge says New Jersey is too broke to make a full payment into the pension system for public workers.

Judge Mary Jacobson on Wednesday refused to grant an injunction sought by unions to reverse Gov. Chris Christie's decision to short this year's payment by nearly $900 million to cover a budget shortfall.

Jacobson wouldn't even go along with a request from Steven Weissman, an attorney representing the Communications Workers of America and other unions, to have Christie turn over $300 million designated for the state's rainy day surplus fund.

Weissman argued that the state may even have more money on hand than the $300 million, but lawyers for Christie countered that the state's financial condition is indeed dire.

"There is no money with five days left in the fiscal year," said Deputy Attorney General Jean Reilly. "It's not the court's role to look under the seat cushions for spare change."

But Reilly didn't score points with the judge when she said there would be no immediate harm to beneficiaries with the reduced payment.

"I don't think you can stand here and tell me it's a healthy pension plan. Is that what you're saying?" Jacobson said to Reilly.

Jacobson said she will hear additional arguments in the future in the case over whether the state is on the hook for full payments, at a level prescribed in 2011 reforms signed by Christie.

Jacobson said Christie had the ability to set fiscal priorities for such things as hospitals, nursing homes, tuition aid and other programs.

"The governor determined it would be extremely unwise to not maintain that amount," Jacobson said of the surplus.

Christie in a statement issued by his office after the ruling called the pension cutback "one of the hard choices the people of New Jersey expect me to make, and I am pleased the court recognized the necessity and urgency of this decision so that we can provide key funding for our schools, our colleges, our hospitals and other essential services."

"For our state's families who are already overburdened by high taxes, raising taxes even further would not solve a problem created by decades of neglect and irresponsibility," the Republican governor said.

Democrats have mostly advocated for the unions and plan on sending a millionaire's tax bill to Christie Thursday, with the extra revenue anticipated to support next year's pension payment. However, Christie is expected to veto it.

Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester, said, "We are disappointed in the ruling and certainly disagree with the outcome. Still, Democrats put forward a budget that keeps our commitments to retirees and middle class New Jersey families regardless of the governor turning his back on them. That is what our budget does and we will not be swayed by the governor's continued commitment to the wealthy few."

Lawyers for New Jersey's public sector unions are seeking to stop the Christie administration from cutting pension payments by a total $2.45 billion, counting the planned reduction for the next fiscal year which begins July 1.

Christie said the move to cut the pension payment was needed after income tax revenues came in well under projections in April, and the administration argued in a court filing this month that the state was "at the brink of fiscal disaster."

Jacobson appeared to accept that argument.

"I don't think it was something he did lightly," Jacobson said. "If you look at the way the executive order (that called for the suspension of the pension payment) was written, he was put between a rock and a hard place."

But public sector unions argued that a law signed by Christie essentially mandates the governor ramp up the pension payments no matter what the state's fiscal condition is.

"In this case the governor has taken a hostile and ideological stance against the funding of the pension system," reads the legal brief filed by the unions. "… In essence, the governor 'rigged' the appropriation process so that the only line item which would feel the pain or be wrongfully underfunded was pensions."

"The governor goes to great pains to declare 'emergency,' 'necessity' and 'disaster' as if he may wield a magic sword to dispense with the law," the brief reads. "These are all smoke screens and a purposeful evasion of the simple issue. Was the statute violated? And, if so, what shall be the remedy?"

Jacobson said the question over pension payments in the upcoming fiscal year is still open, as negotiations over the budget continue. Democrats are arguing for a tax increase that would at least partially pay for the pension contribution.

"The next five days may very well change the complexion of the case that was brought," she said.